I'm quite looking forward to a Trump victory. It'll be great watching his admirers and apologists squirm as they're forced to justify every darker and darker outcome, as they themselves are carted off to the the gulag.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
The Trump rally - why is anyone surprised? Trump has shifted himself firmly into the fascist arena and like any good demagogue is doing a fine job of fanning the flames.
What surprises me are the people insisting that 4-star General Kelly et al are wrong in their detailed and experience-based description of Trump as fascist.
So of course the rally, the abuse, the insults, the othering. That is literally the campaign - fight for the American People against this existential threat from within.
I remain convinced that Harris will win: because the shift in voting intent to elect Trump after the 2020 election in this circumstance doesn't feel tangible, and because polls suggest a very determined deep dive for voters for Harris and a self-hyping "landslide, because everyone I know thinks like me" for Trump.
He's not a fascist and every time* someone calls him a fascist it hardens and motivates his support.
*perhaps less so someone posting on a UK politics website.
If it walks like a fascist, quacks like a fascist...
The issue with this is its the same as right wing people describing anyone left wing as communists. Might make you feel good, but is it an accurate representation? Is Meloni a fascist in Italy (the true home of fascists)?
Meloni seems to be committed to parliamentary democracy. Has she or her party done anything to undermine democracy in Italy? Genuine question.
As opposed to a long running campaign by the MAGA types to take control of the federal vote count and massively distort the process. See Nov 6, where literally setting aside the election result was attempted?
Re Meloni I am thinking back to the hysteria around her coming to power.
When Trump was elected last time one of my colleagues (admittedly someone who is rather Eeyorish about a lot of things) was convinced we were heading for all our war and the use of nukes. Didn't happen of course.
In the UK we see just how much of what is said and written in manifestos and campaign speeches comes to pass.
I suspect that for all the talk, a new Trump presidency will be much like the last.
[/arch one-liner rhetorical question] The last that started with the president withholding military aid from Ukraine unless it dug up dirt on a political opponent and ended with the president refusing to accept defeat in the election and inciting an attempted coup? That one? [/arch one-liner rhetorical question]
ETA: I also don't remember much hysteria when Meloni came to power.
I think there was a fair bit, but it might just have been a certain flint knapper with the hots for her.
Rre Trump - accept that, but the system worked, Biden took over as president. Why do people believe that the US system is so fragile?
Small margins etc. What do you think the Trump-encouraged mob, sorry, peaceful sightseers, would have done if they'd caught Pence or Pelosi?
Probably not very much.
You mean the armed mob with people waving nooses, shouting “hang them”?
armed? the only person shot was an unarmed woman by a police officer pointing his gun through a hole and randomly shooting into the crowd.
Mark Mazza was convicted of carrying two loaded guns on Capitol grounds and assaulting law enforcement officers. Mazza brought a Taurus revolver, loaded with three shotgun shells and two hollow point bullets to the Capitol. He admitted to law enforcement that he was also armed with a second firearm, a loaded .40 caliber semi-automatic pistol.
Guy Wesley Reffitt was found guilty by a jury in 2022 of five charges including entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a firearm.
Christopher Michael Alberts was convicted of nine charges, including six felonies. He was found in possession of a firearm. Alberts arrived at the Capitol with a pocketknife and carried with him, in a holster, a 9-millimeter pistol loaded with 12 rounds of ammunition and an additional bullet in the chamber. Alberts also wore a separate holster containing an additional 12 rounds of ammunition.
Jerod Thomas Bargar pleaded guilty to one felony count of entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds with a deadly or dangerous weapon. Bargar entered onto the restricted Capitol grounds while illegally carrying a loaded, 9-millimeter semi-automatic pistol.
Runcorn & Helsby at the general election was Lab 53%, Ref 18%, Con 16%, Grn 6%, LD 5%.
You can see the Lab vote dropping by at least 10 points to 43% and most of the Tory vote going to Ref which could make it quite close, although Lab would still be favourites.
@lxeagle17 One of the "funnier" signals we have of a Kamala Harris victory is that I have *never* seen DC and corporate conventional wisdom more convinced of Trump running away with it than they are now.
It's really an election with no clear leader, but the GOP confidence is *astounding*.
These people have the worst vibes on earth (me included) and if they "feel" something, be skeptical. Insider vibes are the worst way to guess how the average American voter is going to react to anything.
The Republicans are projecting an image of a landslide and are hyped on early voting numbers in a way I have never seen before.
You can credibly construct an argument for Trump as a favorite, but we can do that for Harris too. The way people are buying it is incredible.
As one of those who has been saying Trump will probably win for a long time, I can see a path to a Harris victory which is 2020 redux but with a much narrower gap in vote share and maybe even smaller majorities in swing states, particularly PA and MI. However, I think it depends on a lot of things going her way.
Re the "vibes" argument, again there can be a delusional element where people kid themselves but, usually, campaigns have an idea of what they see on the street. The key thing - for me - is that the underlying metrics on how consumers feel suggest people are unhappy and it would be historically unprecedented for voters to feel so negative and yet vote for the incumbent party. It may happen but is unlikely.
If there is any hope for Harris in the closing stages, it may be the reaction to the MSG rally in terms of the comments made although Tony Hinchcliffe is well known as being deliberately obnoxious by design. If you see Republican leaders start to bicker or panic over this, it may suggest the issue has gained salience.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The fertility rate (as expressed by the number of births per woman) is still above replacement in over 90 countries including a significant part of sub-Saharan Africa - below replacement fertility is Europe, North and South America, India, China, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand and some other places.
Niger, Chad, Somalia and DR Congo all have above 6 births per woman so we can postulate in 15-20 years we could be facing a surge of immigration from those parts of the world unless we see the kind of economic investment and growth which creates the conditions encouraging people to stay.
I've long thought the future of capitalism lies in Africa if you continue to want a source of cheap labour (all other issues notwithstanding) or want to develop a part of the world hitherto largely neglected (China). Africa as the world's economic powerhouse by 2050 - who knows?
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
Whatever the future's going to be based on, I don't think cheap labour should be part of it, unless we want some very unpleasant Trump-like developments all over the world.
Also unnecessary - she’s surely winning? Unless she has private info that she’s not and she needs to do this
She's winning. She was probably just goaded into an indiscreet answer.
She's right though.
I'm not sure she is. Jenrick was a very successful housing Minister in terms of his record of getting houses built, and it is notable that Tower Hamlets council have now approved this scheme, several years and several millions of wasted pounds later. Jenrick didn't benefit personally, so I don’t hugely see the issue. As for Desmond's jazz mags, if anyone has never looked at such imagery, feel free to cast the first stone.
Hmmm.
Jenrick was Housing Minister from 24 July 2019 – 15 September 2021.
Given the speed at which houses are built, your figures would appear to support him producing a remarkable recovery. What happened after he left the role?
I am not sure that I feel that an increase of 7% in affordable is worth a nearly 5 year delay - apart from anything else it just produces more competition elsewhere in the hosuing system.
@lxeagle17 One of the "funnier" signals we have of a Kamala Harris victory is that I have *never* seen DC and corporate conventional wisdom more convinced of Trump running away with it than they are now.
It's really an election with no clear leader, but the GOP confidence is *astounding*.
These people have the worst vibes on earth (me included) and if they "feel" something, be skeptical. Insider vibes are the worst way to guess how the average American voter is going to react to anything.
The Republicans are projecting an image of a landslide and are hyped on early voting numbers in a way I have never seen before.
You can credibly construct an argument for Trump as a favorite, but we can do that for Harris too. The way people are buying it is incredible.
As one of those who has been saying Trump will probably win for a long time, I can see a path to a Harris victory which is 2020 redux but with a much narrower gap in vote share and maybe even smaller majorities in swing states, particularly PA and MI. However, I think it depends on a lot of things going her way.
Re the "vibes" argument, again there can be a delusional element where people kid themselves but, usually, campaigns have an idea of what they see on the street. The key thing - for me - is that the underlying metrics on how consumers feel suggest people are unhappy and it would be historically unprecedented for voters to feel so negative and yet vote for the incumbent party. It may happen but is unlikely.
If there is any hope for Harris in the closing stages, it may be the reaction to the MSG rally in terms of the comments made although Tony Hinchcliffe is well known as being deliberately obnoxious by design. If you see Republican leaders start to bicker or panic over this, it may suggest the issue has gained salience.
The way Harris is at pains to claim that her administration will represent 'change' rather than be a continuation of the present government gives a strong indication that her campaign thinks incumbency is a liability.
I doubt the Hinchcliffe comments will move the dial and it might cause them to waste their efforts attacking someone who isn't the candidate.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The fertility rate (as expressed by the number of births per woman) is still above replacement in over 90 countries including a significant part of sub-Saharan Africa - below replacement fertility is Europe, North and South America, India, China, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand and some other places.
Niger, Chad, Somalia and DR Congo all have above 6 births per woman so we can postulate in 15-20 years we could be facing a surge of immigration from those parts of the world unless we see the kind of economic investment and growth which creates the conditions encouraging people to stay.
I've long thought the future of capitalism lies in Africa if you continue to want a source of cheap labour (all other issues notwithstanding) or want to develop a part of the world hitherto largely neglected (China). Africa as the world's economic powerhouse by 2050 - who knows?
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
Whatever the future's going to be based on, I don't think cheap labour should be part of it, unless we want some very unpleasant Trump-like developments all over the world.
If we want to return to the engine that created much of the current wealth of the world, what we need is more productivity.
Which means more automation.
Like solar power, the costs of a number of automating a number of things are falling. A big problem is people clinging to the past.
A relative runs a building company. Electric mini diggers (think tiny, one man excavator) are cheap enough now, that buying them to dig basements under houses makes sense. Costs x men’s wages, does the work of y.
First one paid for itself in a year of work…
Yet when he talks to his competitors, they are still living in the world where any task is a matter of enough cheap Eastern Europeans. Invest? That sounds weird!
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
How are you going to design a policy that incentivises white couples to have babies but not other couples?
Runcorn & Helsby at the general election was Lab 53%, Ref 18%, Con 16%, Grn 6%, LD 5%.
You can see the Lab vote dropping by at least 10 points to 43% and most of the Tory vote going to Ref which could make it quite close, although Lab would still be favourites.
To have a future Reform need to win or get a very decent second place.
And they should win because there is zero incentive to vote for a Labour MP when he/she will simple be another number given the Government's vast majority.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The fertility rate (as expressed by the number of births per woman) is still above replacement in over 90 countries including a significant part of sub-Saharan Africa - below replacement fertility is Europe, North and South America, India, China, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand and some other places.
Niger, Chad, Somalia and DR Congo all have above 6 births per woman so we can postulate in 15-20 years we could be facing a surge of immigration from those parts of the world unless we see the kind of economic investment and growth which creates the conditions encouraging people to stay.
I've long thought the future of capitalism lies in Africa if you continue to want a source of cheap labour (all other issues notwithstanding) or want to develop a part of the world hitherto largely neglected (China). Africa as the world's economic powerhouse by 2050 - who knows?
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
The highest fertility rates are almost all in nations with the highest rate of religious belief too. Even in developed nations it is more religious nations like Ireland and Israel that tend to have the highest fertility rates
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
How are you going to design a policy that incentivises white couples to have babies but not not other couples?
I would forbid white men from accessing porn so they are forced to do the real thing
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.
@lxeagle17 One of the "funnier" signals we have of a Kamala Harris victory is that I have *never* seen DC and corporate conventional wisdom more convinced of Trump running away with it than they are now.
It's really an election with no clear leader, but the GOP confidence is *astounding*.
These people have the worst vibes on earth (me included) and if they "feel" something, be skeptical. Insider vibes are the worst way to guess how the average American voter is going to react to anything.
The Republicans are projecting an image of a landslide and are hyped on early voting numbers in a way I have never seen before.
You can credibly construct an argument for Trump as a favorite, but we can do that for Harris too. The way people are buying it is incredible.
As one of those who has been saying Trump will probably win for a long time, I can see a path to a Harris victory which is 2020 redux but with a much narrower gap in vote share and maybe even smaller majorities in swing states, particularly PA and MI. However, I think it depends on a lot of things going her way.
Re the "vibes" argument, again there can be a delusional element where people kid themselves but, usually, campaigns have an idea of what they see on the street. The key thing - for me - is that the underlying metrics on how consumers feel suggest people are unhappy and it would be historically unprecedented for voters to feel so negative and yet vote for the incumbent party. It may happen but is unlikely.
If there is any hope for Harris in the closing stages, it may be the reaction to the MSG rally in terms of the comments made although Tony Hinchcliffe is well known as being deliberately obnoxious by design. If you see Republican leaders start to bicker or panic over this, it may suggest the issue has gained salience.
The Trump campaign though is different in that it's to some extent predicated on the idea he can't lose. Even if they were seeing trends and internal polling that looked bad for them there's no way we'd hear the usual whispers that come out of a campaign that's drowning.
Which isn't to say Harris is a favourite - nobody I think knows given the narrowness of the margins in key state and mixed data. But it's the usual thing of commentators being desperate to make a call for a narrow favourite on incomplete information, despite it being functionally a coin flip.
Plus fears over what a Trump victory would mean, meaning that's the outcome lots of normally sober types are bracing for.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
How are you going to design a policy that incentivises white couples to have babies but not other couples?
I'm sure there's a very helpful legal code from Nuremberg that we could crib.
This is a troubling case. Some sad deviant guy uses tech to make pedo images. Also “encourages” others to do depraved things
Definitely needs a custodial sentence (also therapy and probably severe medication). But 18 years in prison??? Really?
AFAICS there is no proof any living individual was physically harmed by his actions. Yet he gets 18 years. At the same time Starmer is releasing actual violent pedophile rapists after they’ve served far far less than that
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Robert Frost was a great poet. But not sure he’d agree with your position. In the same poem it says:
Before I built a wall I’d ask to know What I was walling in or walling out,
And overall I don’t read it as plea for more fences.
Reform has to go all in on any Mike Amesbury by-election, or risk looking like all mouth and no trousers, doesn’t it?
Does not look like a winner for the Tories or LibDems on the face of it.
Yes;
That said, doesn't Mr Amesbury need to be charged, convicted, and then get a custodial sentence?
Bound to get a suspension worthy of a recall petition isn’t he?
Suspensions, I think, are usually for stuff you did in the Commons or around your role as an MP, not for unrelated possible criminality, yes…? Although Margaret Ferrier is an edge case, I guess.
Isn’t there a “bringing into disrepute” element? Else Boris would have been out of scope.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
I wish more had been of this 10 -15 years ago, I might’ve got cracking earlier and aimed for higher than replacement rate
I managed to have 3 but they might be located on the wrong bit of the colour chart for the great replacement crowd.
Scottish sub samples are dangerous of course but the two grandchildren I have acquired this month, 50% of them in Scotland and the second at 6 am this morning, are a small piece of unreliable data that the tide is turning. That makes 5 which is, in these childless days, a bit above par for the course.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
How are you going to design a policy that incentivises white couples to have babies but not other couples?
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.
I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them
When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings
However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy
This is a troubling case. Some sad deviant guy uses tech to make pedo images. Also “encourages” others to do depraved things
Definitely needs a custodial sentence (also therapy and probably severe medication). But 18 years in prison??? Really?
AFAICS there is no proof any living individual was physically harmed by his actions. Yet he gets 18 years. At the same time Starmer is releasing actual violent pedophile rapists after they’ve served far far less than that
One could almost argue he was doing a service, and we should offer this to paedophiles who want to engage and avoid offending, on the NHS, but for the fact he based them on real kids.
No need to worry about the fertility rate in the US. When Trump is elected and Project 2025 is enacted it will go shooting back up once there is a nationwide abortion ban and birth control is made illegal.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.
I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them
When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings
However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy
Climate change is basically fixed. With the advent of likely policy change plus foreseeable technology, we’re heading for about 2.5 degrees of warming. Not great if you live in certain places, but not existential for the human race. And we should gain decent red wine.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
This is a troubling case. Some sad deviant guy uses tech to make pedo images. Also “encourages” others to do depraved things
Definitely needs a custodial sentence (also therapy and probably severe medication). But 18 years in prison??? Really?
AFAICS there is no proof any living individual was physically harmed by his actions. Yet he gets 18 years. At the same time Starmer is releasing actual violent pedophile rapists after they’ve served far far less than that
One could almost argue he was doing a service, and we should offer this to paedophiles who want to engage and avoid offending, on the NHS, but for the fact he based them on real kids.
Yes the use of real images of children is what justifies a custodial sentence. But 18 years??!
This is an area of law which will only get thornier. If we can create perfectly plausible fake porn which satisfies pedos and stops them offending, should we?
If no one is hurt, why not? It will actually PREVENT real crimes and real hurt
How can the fertility rate *per mother* be less than 1.0?!?
Surely by definition any mother has an individual fertility rate of at least 1?
Not if the average woman now has no children
It was a bit of well spotted pedantry. 'Per mother' has to be a number greater or equal to 1. 'Per woman' is what should have been said which can be less than 1.
“Working people” means public sector workers, not those in the private sector, or self-employed.
I was interested to realise that because I'm able pay an unexpected bill and I derive dividend income from holding shares I'm not classed as a working person. Though I don't have a chequebook so maybe I am?
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.
I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them
When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings
However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy
Climate change is basically fixed. With the advent of likely policy change plus foreseeable technology, we’re heading for about 2.5 degrees of warming. Not great if you live in certain places, but not existential for the human race. And we should gain decent red wine.
For the umpteenth time, it's not. The more carbon there is in the atmosphere, the worse it will be, and there are indications that the damage incurred will increase exponentially with temperature change. Even if we blast past 2 degrees, 3 would be much better than 4.
"Survival of the human race" is not the outcome on which we should assess our efforts, IMO. I'm a little more ambitious.
This is a troubling case. Some sad deviant guy uses tech to make pedo images. Also “encourages” others to do depraved things
Definitely needs a custodial sentence (also therapy and probably severe medication). But 18 years in prison??? Really?
AFAICS there is no proof any living individual was physically harmed by his actions. Yet he gets 18 years. At the same time Starmer is releasing actual violent pedophile rapists after they’ve served far far less than that
Emm - Starmer doesn't control who is being released so he definitely isn't releasing any 'actual violent paedophile rapists'.
The only possible exception is the early release programme which as we have been told doesn't include that category and is entirely the fault of the last Tory government who did zippo about the prison issue.
As someone who doesn't support Starmer I have no problem with him being blamed for stuff, but let's keep it factual for credibility purposes.
This is a troubling case. Some sad deviant guy uses tech to make pedo images. Also “encourages” others to do depraved things
Definitely needs a custodial sentence (also therapy and probably severe medication). But 18 years in prison??? Really?
AFAICS there is no proof any living individual was physically harmed by his actions. Yet he gets 18 years. At the same time Starmer is releasing actual violent pedophile rapists after they’ve served far far less than that
One could almost argue he was doing a service, and we should offer this to paedophiles who want to engage and avoid offending, on the NHS, but for the fact he based them on real kids.
Yes the use of real images of children is what justifies a custodial sentence. But 18 years??!
This is an area of law which will only get thornier. If we can create perfectly plausible fake porn which satisfies pedos and stops them offending, should we?
If no one is hurt, why not? It will actually PREVENT real crimes and real hurt
Of course we should - adult porn is proven to reduce rape, so it's pretty much guaranteed that AI paedophile porn also would reduce child abuse. Plus even more importantly it's not hurting anyone anyway - AI content of any kind whatsoever should be legal imo.
But it's a complete political non starter about a very niche issue, so I wouldn't expend any more effort considering it. You might as well expect them to reform stamp duty!
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
So the Philadelphia Inquirer has not found that endorsement thing too tricky:
“Voters face an easy but tectonic choice in the race for the White House.
Will they choose the first woman or the oldest man to be the next president?
Will they choose the prosecutor or the convict?
Will they choose the candidate who supports restoring Roe v. Wade, or the man who bragged about overturning it?
Will they choose the candidate with a tax plan to help the middle class or the one who wants to help the superrich?
Will they choose the candidate who backs a tough bipartisan immigration law or the guy who killed the measure?
Will they choose the candidate who wants to combat climate change or the one who thinks it is a hoax?
Will they choose the candidate who upholds the peaceful transfer of power or the one who summoned a violent mob to attack the U.S. Capitol?
Will they choose the candidate who stands up to Vladimir Putin or the one who said Russia could do “whatever the hell they want”?
Will they choose the candidate who champions education, health care for all, and sensible gun safety laws, or the person who wants to close the U.S. Department of Education, repeal Obamacare, and told supporters after a school shooting to “get over it”?
Will they choose the candidate who supports the working class or the one who is anti-union and opposed raising the minimum wage?
Will they choose a woman of color who wants to unite the country, or a man with a history of misogynistic, racist, and divisive comments and actions?
Will they choose the candidate who supports LGBTQ rights or the one who wants to roll back protections for the gay community?
Will they choose the candidate who will uphold the presidential oath, or the one who was impeached twice for high crimes and misdemeanors, profited from the White House, dangled pardons to cronies, and was indicted four times?
This baker’s dozen list could go on, but the choice is clear and obvious. Vice President Kamala Harris wants to help all Americans.
Donald Trump wants to help himself.
That is why The Inquirer endorses Kamala Devi Harris to be the 47th president of the United States.
If elected, Harris, 60, would be the first Black, South Asian woman to hold the nation’s highest office. She rarely references her historic candidacy, and instead is laser-focused on earning votes through the substance of her vision, ideas, and temperament.” — Inquirer Editorial Staff
There's a great ad to be had there. Perfect for an animation.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.
This is a troubling case. Some sad deviant guy uses tech to make pedo images. Also “encourages” others to do depraved things
Definitely needs a custodial sentence (also therapy and probably severe medication). But 18 years in prison??? Really?
AFAICS there is no proof any living individual was physically harmed by his actions. Yet he gets 18 years. At the same time Starmer is releasing actual violent pedophile rapists after they’ve served far far less than that
One could almost argue he was doing a service, and we should offer this to paedophiles who want to engage and avoid offending, on the NHS, but for the fact he based them on real kids.
Yes the use of real images of children is what justifies a custodial sentence. But 18 years??!
This is an area of law which will only get thornier. If we can create perfectly plausible fake porn which satisfies pedos and stops them offending, should we?
If no one is hurt, why not? It will actually PREVENT real crimes and real hurt
Of course we should - adult porn is proven to reduce rape, so it's pretty much guaranteed that AI paedophile porn also would reduce child abuse. Plus even more importantly it's not hurting anyone anyway - AI content of any kind whatsoever should be legal imo.
But it's a complete political non starter about a very niche issue, so I wouldn't expend any more effort considering it. You might as well expect them to reform stamp duty!
I completely agree. It’s the obvious cure for horrible pedophilia. I’d also create sexbots for them
Let these sickos enact their fantasies on harmless silicon robots - problem solved
Yet I suspect some weird Puritanism will prevent us doing this - so real kids will still be really hurt
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
I wish more had been of this 10 -15 years ago, I might’ve got cracking earlier and aimed for higher than replacement rate
I managed to have 3 but they might be located on the wrong bit of the colour chart for the great replacement crowd.
Scottish sub samples are dangerous of course but the two grandchildren I have acquired this month, 50% of them in Scotland and the second at 6 am this morning, are a small piece of unreliable data that the tide is turning. That makes 5 which is, in these childless days, a bit above par for the course.
Have you explained to the parents that, forevermore, they are Scottish Sub Sample Data Point 1 & 2?
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
How are you going to design a policy that incentivises white couples to have babies but not not other couples?
I would forbid white men from accessing porn so they are forced to do the real thing
Mixed race couples look at your policy and wonder.
Anyhoo, I think you’re headed for a referral to Prevent.
This is a troubling case. Some sad deviant guy uses tech to make pedo images. Also “encourages” others to do depraved things
Definitely needs a custodial sentence (also therapy and probably severe medication). But 18 years in prison??? Really?
AFAICS there is no proof any living individual was physically harmed by his actions. Yet he gets 18 years. At the same time Starmer is releasing actual violent pedophile rapists after they’ve served far far less than that
One could almost argue he was doing a service, and we should offer this to paedophiles who want to engage and avoid offending, on the NHS, but for the fact he based them on real kids.
Yes the use of real images of children is what justifies a custodial sentence. But 18 years??!
This is an area of law which will only get thornier. If we can create perfectly plausible fake porn which satisfies pedos and stops them offending, should we?
If no one is hurt, why not? It will actually PREVENT real crimes and real hurt
Of course we should - adult porn is proven to reduce rape, so it's pretty much guaranteed that AI paedophile porn also would reduce child abuse. Plus even more importantly it's not hurting anyone anyway - AI content of any kind whatsoever should be legal imo.
But it's a complete political non starter about a very niche issue, so I wouldn't expend any more effort considering it. You might as well expect them to reform stamp duty!
I completely agree. It’s the obvious cure for horrible pedophilia. I’d also create sexbots for them
Let these sickos enact their fantasies on harmless silicon robots - problem solved
Yet I suspect some weird Puritanism will prevent us doing this - so real kids will still be really hurt
The war is not against the act, it is against the concept.
This is a troubling case. Some sad deviant guy uses tech to make pedo images. Also “encourages” others to do depraved things
Definitely needs a custodial sentence (also therapy and probably severe medication). But 18 years in prison??? Really?
AFAICS there is no proof any living individual was physically harmed by his actions. Yet he gets 18 years. At the same time Starmer is releasing actual violent pedophile rapists after they’ve served far far less than that
One could almost argue he was doing a service, and we should offer this to paedophiles who want to engage and avoid offending, on the NHS, but for the fact he based them on real kids.
Yes the use of real images of children is what justifies a custodial sentence. But 18 years??!
This is an area of law which will only get thornier. If we can create perfectly plausible fake porn which satisfies pedos and stops them offending, should we?
If no one is hurt, why not? It will actually PREVENT real crimes and real hurt
Of course we should - adult porn is proven to reduce rape, so it's pretty much guaranteed that AI paedophile porn also would reduce child abuse. Plus even more importantly it's not hurting anyone anyway - AI content of any kind whatsoever should be legal imo.
But it's a complete political non starter about a very niche issue, so I wouldn't expend any more effort considering it. You might as well expect them to reform stamp duty!
I completely agree. It’s the obvious cure for horrible pedophilia. I’d also create sexbots for them
Let these sickos enact their fantasies on harmless silicon robots - problem solved
Yet I suspect some weird Puritanism will prevent us doing this - so real kids will still be really hurt
The war is not against the act, it is against the concept.
This is a troubling case. Some sad deviant guy uses tech to make pedo images. Also “encourages” others to do depraved things
Definitely needs a custodial sentence (also therapy and probably severe medication). But 18 years in prison??? Really?
AFAICS there is no proof any living individual was physically harmed by his actions. Yet he gets 18 years. At the same time Starmer is releasing actual violent pedophile rapists after they’ve served far far less than that
One could almost argue he was doing a service, and we should offer this to paedophiles who want to engage and avoid offending, on the NHS, but for the fact he based them on real kids.
Yes the use of real images of children is what justifies a custodial sentence. But 18 years??!
This is an area of law which will only get thornier. If we can create perfectly plausible fake porn which satisfies pedos and stops them offending, should we?
If no one is hurt, why not? It will actually PREVENT real crimes and real hurt
The judges sentencing remarks are not (SFAICS) yet available. I think it is more or less certain to be appealed and the Court of Appeal can give some guidance. It seems long, OTOH he isn't a bloke you want hanging around the playground.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
Yep - I would never see my grandson as less British because his mother's family is Jamaican. But clearly some on here do. Once you start going down that far-right rabbit hole it's very hard to get out of it.
Will Stancil @whstancil · 15m A few things that are coming clear: -with election day voting up compared to 2020, this race will largely be decided Tuesday -there are still major campaign developments sending shockwaves through media, like the MSG rally -we're pretty much past the polling horizon Will Stancil @whstancil · 14m So we're more or less flying blind now.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.
I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them
When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings
However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy
Climate change is basically fixed. With the advent of likely policy change plus foreseeable technology, we’re heading for about 2.5 degrees of warming. Not great if you live in certain places, but not existential for the human race. And we should gain decent red wine.
For the umpteenth time, it's not. The more carbon there is in the atmosphere, the worse it will be, and there are indications that the damage incurred will increase exponentially with temperature change. Even if we blast past 2 degrees, 3 would be much better than 4.
"Survival of the human race" is not the outcome on which we should assess our efforts, IMO. I'm a little more ambitious.
It depends what you mean by "worse". That is pretty much a human construct.
The species alive during the Eocene optimum would hate this ice age climate, so it isn't that 4 degrees would kill all life on earth.
It might flood London, but cities come and go.
Loss of natural habitat seems to me to be the most immediate problem. Species can't move if they are constrained, so instead they will be lost.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
To me, basing your fertility and migration based on "whiteness", i.e. race, is racist.
To take your points in turn:
1. Your race will survive. That's not a real concern, at least not with a timeframe less than 1,000 years.
2. I fundamentally don't care about the race of Britain. I care about Britain and would much rather live here than anywhere else. But it is not the whiteness of Britain that makes is a great place. Non-white Brits, or mixed-race Brits, are just as integrated into British culture as white Brits. There are exceptions, of course, but in general we are pretty good at it (and can aim to be better still).
Your Gambia analogy fails for the reason of pt 3 of my original point: controlled pace of migration being necessary. There is a limit to the pace of migration that any country can support as a proportion of the current population. If Gambia had migration at a sustainable pace, consisting entirely of white people who generally integrated into Gambian culture, and Gambians objected on the basis of race, then yes I would say is racist for them to object to that.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.
You have betrayed your race, it seems. My son has too.
This is a troubling case. Some sad deviant guy uses tech to make pedo images. Also “encourages” others to do depraved things
Definitely needs a custodial sentence (also therapy and probably severe medication). But 18 years in prison??? Really?
AFAICS there is no proof any living individual was physically harmed by his actions. Yet he gets 18 years. At the same time Starmer is releasing actual violent pedophile rapists after they’ve served far far less than that
One could almost argue he was doing a service, and we should offer this to paedophiles who want to engage and avoid offending, on the NHS, but for the fact he based them on real kids.
Yes the use of real images of children is what justifies a custodial sentence. But 18 years??!
This is an area of law which will only get thornier. If we can create perfectly plausible fake porn which satisfies pedos and stops them offending, should we?
If no one is hurt, why not? It will actually PREVENT real crimes and real hurt
Of course we should - adult porn is proven to reduce rape, so it's pretty much guaranteed that AI paedophile porn also would reduce child abuse. Plus even more importantly it's not hurting anyone anyway - AI content of any kind whatsoever should be legal imo.
But it's a complete political non starter about a very niche issue, so I wouldn't expend any more effort considering it. You might as well expect them to reform stamp duty!
I completely agree. It’s the obvious cure for horrible pedophilia. I’d also create sexbots for them
Let these sickos enact their fantasies on harmless silicon robots - problem solved
Yet I suspect some weird Puritanism will prevent us doing this - so real kids will still be really hurt
The war is not against the act, it is against the concept.
Emerson had Harris at +3 in the state a few days back so this is not exactly that much of an outlier
It's entirely possible, if Trump is outperforming polls as in 2020, that New Hampshire is in reach. It wasn't that long ago that it regularly voted Republican.
It also has a popular (retiring) Republican Governor, Chris Sununu, albeit one who is very much at the Never Trump end of the party.
That said: polling currently shows the Dems doing relatively worse with Black and Hispanic voters, while doing slightly better with white ones. If this is correct, then it would be very surprising if Trump were to pickup New Hampshire.
It's also worth remembering that in the primaries, this was a State which did not exactly flock to support Donald Trump this time around.
So, I'm going with a relatively comfortable hold Dem hold.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.
I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them
When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings
However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy
Climate change is basically fixed. With the advent of likely policy change plus foreseeable technology, we’re heading for about 2.5 degrees of warming. Not great if you live in certain places, but not existential for the human race. And we should gain decent red wine.
For the umpteenth time, it's not. The more carbon there is in the atmosphere, the worse it will be, and there are indications that the damage incurred will increase exponentially with temperature change. Even if we blast past 2 degrees, 3 would be much better than 4.
"Survival of the human race" is not the outcome on which we should assess our efforts, IMO. I'm a little more ambitious.
Nah. Doing any better than I suggest implies societal change nobody will accept. We need to accept 2.5 degrees as a win and help those who suffer most. Unless they are Russian.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
Is there something special about your and my race? Why wouldn't it survive? Why does a country have to stay the same (not that I would expect it to change) and what do you propose to do about Australia, New Zealand, all of South America, North America, etc, etc which have all changed at some point in recent history regarding their ethnic makeup.
Or do we all pile back into Africa, back to where we came from.
The world is more cosmopolitan now which is great. The Uk is very different to what it was 150 years ago, but so are the other places I have mentioned. More so. Do you propose changing all of them as well?
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
Is there something special about your and my race? Why wouldn't it survive? Why does a country have to stay the same (not that I would expect it to change) and what do you propose to do about Australia, New Zealand, all of South America, North America, etc, etc which have all changed at some point in recent history regarding their ethnic makeup.
Or do we all pile back into Africa, back to where we came from.
The world is more cosmopolitan now which is great. The Uk is very different to what it was 150 years ago, but so are the other places I have mentioned. More so. Do you propose changing all of them as well?
I notice you haven't answered his question about Gambia.
Watching the Drop on daytime television. Debbis McGee's just been asked what SKS's job was before politics - law, banking or teaching. She went banking. Instructive how little amateurs pay attention to what we think everyone knows. He'd have been furious, though, right?
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
How are you going to design a policy that incentivises white couples to have babies but not not other couples?
I would forbid white men from accessing porn so they are forced to do the real thing
Mixed race couples look at your policy and wonder.
Anyhoo, I think you’re headed for a referral to Prevent.
Strong "started early" vibes from PB's favourite race realist today.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.
You have betrayed your race, it seems. My son has too.
If my 'race' involves being the same 'race' as @:Leon, then I'm glad I've put some slightly different blood into it. If he is a prime example of his 'race', then it is truly diseased.
Fortunately, from experience think he's very much an outlier.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
Yep - I would never see my grandson as less British because his mother's family is Jamaican. But clearly some on here do. Once you start going down that far-right rabbit hole it's very hard to get out of it.
Does anyone have a handy pocket chart* to provide the racial hierarchy on The New Order?
*A group of officers in the Imperial Japanese Army actually did this. Apparently they were concerned that the rank and file would only have ever met other Japanese people. And would get their baby steps in racism wrong.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.
I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them
When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings
However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy
Climate change is basically fixed. With the advent of likely policy change plus foreseeable technology, we’re heading for about 2.5 degrees of warming. Not great if you live in certain places, but not existential for the human race. And we should gain decent red wine.
For the umpteenth time, it's not. The more carbon there is in the atmosphere, the worse it will be, and there are indications that the damage incurred will increase exponentially with temperature change. Even if we blast past 2 degrees, 3 would be much better than 4.
"Survival of the human race" is not the outcome on which we should assess our efforts, IMO. I'm a little more ambitious.
It depends what you mean by "worse". That is pretty much a human construct.
The species alive during the Eocene optimum would hate this ice age climate, so it isn't that 4 degrees would kill all life on earth.
It might flood London, but cities come and go.
Loss of natural habitat seems to me to be the most immediate problem. Species can't move if they are constrained, so instead they will be lost.
Species exist because of their natural habit.
Should the natural habit change, evolution does its thing, and species change.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
To me, basing your fertility and migration based on "whiteness", i.e. race, is racist.
To take your points in turn:
1. Your race will survive. That's not a real concern, at least not with a timeframe less than 1,000 years.
2. I fundamentally don't care about the race of Britain. I care about Britain and would much rather live here than anywhere else. But it is not the whiteness of Britain that makes is a great place. Non-white Brits, or mixed-race Brits, are just as integrated into British culture as white Brits. There are exceptions, of course, but in general we are pretty good at it (and can aim to be better still).
Your Gambia analogy fails for the reason of pt 3 of my original point: controlled pace of migration being necessary. There is a limit to the pace of migration that any country can support as a proportion of the current population. If Gambia had migration at a sustainable pace, consisting entirely of white people who generally integrated into Gambian culture, and Gambians objected on the basis of race, then yes I would say is racist for them to object to that.
So no country is allowed to exist, in the future, on the basis of its ethnicity. No black, Asian, Latino, Inuit, or white country can say “our ethnicity is a fundamental part of what we are as a country and we want our ethnicity to dominate within that country, this is our ethnic homeland”
That’s your position? If so, I respect it. You are intellectually coherent and honest
I also think it is globalist drivelling nonsense which has caused evil already and will lead to far right governments everywhere, because it contradicts human nature
Watching the Drop on daytime television. Debbis McGee's just been asked what SKS's job was before politics - law, banking or teaching. She went banking. Instructive how little amateurs pay attention to what we think everyone knows. He'd have been furious, though, right?
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.
You have betrayed your race, it seems. My son has too.
If my 'race' involves being the same 'race' as @:Leon, then I'm glad I've put some slightly different blood into it. If he is a prime example of his 'race', then it is truly diseased.
Fortunately, from experience think he's very much an outlier.
Too much time alone + internet access + booze = trouble
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.
I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them
When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings
However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy
I don’t agree on any count. I think the number of humans on earth is perfectly fine, the climate is perfectly fine, and climate change can be mitigated fairly simply with the means we thankfully have at our disposal. We have a stupidity problem not a climate problem. Hence Net Zero.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.
You have betrayed your race, it seems. My son has too.
If my 'race' involves being the same 'race' as @:Leon, then I'm glad I've put some slightly different blood into it. If he is a prime example of his 'race', then it is truly diseased.
Fortunately, from experience think he's very much an outlier.
Too much time alone + internet access = trouble
lol. I’ve just spent the last 3 weeks in east Asia mixing with a quite fantastical range of humanity. I know far more of the world than you
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
Is there something special about your and my race? Why wouldn't it survive? Why does a country have to stay the same (not that I would expect it to change) and what do you propose to do about Australia, New Zealand, all of South America, North America, etc, etc which have all changed at some point in recent history regarding their ethnic makeup.
Or do we all pile back into Africa, back to where we came from.
The world is more cosmopolitan now which is great. The Uk is very different to what it was 150 years ago, but so are the other places I have mentioned. More so. Do you propose changing all of them as well?
I notice you haven't answered his question about Gambia.
See @Ratters reply last para. I can't better that.
As it wasn't a question to me I didn't feel obliged to counter every idiotic point @leon made.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.
You have betrayed your race, it seems. My son has too.
If my 'race' involves being the same 'race' as @:Leon, then I'm glad I've put some slightly different blood into it. If he is a prime example of his 'race', then it is truly diseased.
Fortunately, from experience think he's very much an outlier.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.
I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them
When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings
However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy
I don’t agree on any count. I think the number of humans on earth is perfectly fine, the climate is perfectly fine, and climate change can be mitigated fairly simply with the means we thankfully have at our disposal. We have a stupidity problem not a climate problem. Hence Net Zero.
No. 8bn is too many. Far too many. You need to travel to see it
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.
You have betrayed your race, it seems. My son has too.
If my 'race' involves being the same 'race' as @:Leon, then I'm glad I've put some slightly different blood into it. If he is a prime example of his 'race', then it is truly diseased.
Fortunately, from experience think he's very much an outlier.
Too much time alone + internet access = trouble
lol. I’ve just spent the last 3 weeks in east Asia mixing with a quite fantastical range of humanity. I know far more of the world than you
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.
You have betrayed your race, it seems. My son has too.
If my 'race' involves being the same 'race' as @:Leon, then I'm glad I've put some slightly different blood into it. If he is a prime example of his 'race', then it is truly diseased.
Fortunately, from experience think he's very much an outlier.
Too much time alone + internet access = trouble
lol. I’ve just spent the last 3 weeks in east Asia mixing with a quite fantastical range of humanity. I know far more of the world than you
And yet you're a bog standard racist.
Which is why we need immigration - to start with, a better variety of racists.
18 months jail for Tommy Robinson for contempt of court. Good riddance.
But how long before elements of the Right start describing him as a political prisoner, rounded up and incarcerated by Sir Keir's police state?
3.2 seconds?
1) the claims were not false @itvnews Tommy is a political prisoner 2) your sketch artist needs to stick to his f*cking day job. They don’t call him Cataracts-Carl for nothing. #lügenpresse. #TommyRobinson https://x.com/KTHopkins/status/1850899352161501687
I'm interested to see how quickly, and how far, this story crosses in Reform and Conservative Right elements. Since it is Tommy Robinson I think it probably will not go very far.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.
You have betrayed your race, it seems. My son has too.
If my 'race' involves being the same 'race' as @:Leon, then I'm glad I've put some slightly different blood into it. If he is a prime example of his 'race', then it is truly diseased.
Fortunately, from experience think he's very much an outlier.
Too much time alone + internet access = trouble
lol. I’ve just spent the last 3 weeks in east Asia mixing with a quite fantastical range of humanity. I know far more of the world than you
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.
You have betrayed your race, it seems. My son has too.
If my 'race' involves being the same 'race' as @:Leon, then I'm glad I've put some slightly different blood into it. If he is a prime example of his 'race', then it is truly diseased.
Fortunately, from experience think he's very much an outlier.
Too much time alone + internet access = trouble
lol. I’ve just spent the last 3 weeks in east Asia mixing with a quite fantastical range of humanity. I know far more of the world than you
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.
You have betrayed your race, it seems. My son has too.
If my 'race' involves being the same 'race' as @:Leon, then I'm glad I've put some slightly different blood into it. If he is a prime example of his 'race', then it is truly diseased.
Fortunately, from experience think he's very much an outlier.
Too much time alone + internet access = trouble
lol. I’ve just spent the last 3 weeks in east Asia mixing with a quite fantastical range of humanity. I know far more of the world than you
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
Nah, the biggest story in the world is and remains climate change. I know it's not fashionable or sexy to talk about it any more, but the gradual rendering uninhabitable of large areas of the Earth surface has got to be humanity's biggest crisis. However, because of its slow pace (on human timescales) and the difficulty in implementing solutions, many of the world's politicians just pay lip service to the issue or simply pretend it's not happening.
I’m pretty sure they are linked. The world has far too many people and they are polluting a planet that cannot sustain them
When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings
However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy
Climate change is basically fixed. With the advent of likely policy change plus foreseeable technology, we’re heading for about 2.5 degrees of warming. Not great if you live in certain places, but not existential for the human race. And we should gain decent red wine.
For the umpteenth time, it's not. The more carbon there is in the atmosphere, the worse it will be, and there are indications that the damage incurred will increase exponentially with temperature change. Even if we blast past 2 degrees, 3 would be much better than 4.
"Survival of the human race" is not the outcome on which we should assess our efforts, IMO. I'm a little more ambitious.
While I fully agree with this post, I feel obliged to say:
Carbon dioxide. Not carbon. We don't have lumps of coal floating around in the sky.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
Yep - I would never see my grandson as less British because his mother's family is Jamaican. But clearly some on here do. Once you start going down that far-right rabbit hole it's very hard to get out of it.
It's extraordinary that posters on here let that attention seeking bore take you down these rabbit holes with him
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
To me, basing your fertility and migration based on "whiteness", i.e. race, is racist.
To take your points in turn:
1. Your race will survive. That's not a real concern, at least not with a timeframe less than 1,000 years.
2. I fundamentally don't care about the race of Britain. I care about Britain and would much rather live here than anywhere else. But it is not the whiteness of Britain that makes is a great place. Non-white Brits, or mixed-race Brits, are just as integrated into British culture as white Brits. There are exceptions, of course, but in general we are pretty good at it (and can aim to be better still).
Your Gambia analogy fails for the reason of pt 3 of my original point: controlled pace of migration being necessary. There is a limit to the pace of migration that any country can support as a proportion of the current population. If Gambia had migration at a sustainable pace, consisting entirely of white people who generally integrated into Gambian culture, and Gambians objected on the basis of race, then yes I would say is racist for them to object to that.
So no country is allowed to exist, in the future, on the basis of its ethnicity. No black, Asian, Latino, Inuit, or white country can say “our ethnicity is a fundamental part of what we are as a country and we want our ethnicity to dominate within that country, this is our ethnic homeland”
That’s your position? If so, I respect it. You are intellectually coherent and honest
I also think it is globalist drivelling nonsense which has caused evil already and will lead to far right governments everywhere, because it contradicts human nature
Good grief what are you saying? You really think a country should exist on the basis of its ethnicity. It might have a history that is primarily of a particular ethnicity (or come to that religion, because that is the next step), but once you get to the point you are suggesting we are heading towards Germany in the 30s, Rwanda, etc, etc.
Stuff should be allowed to organically evolve and if it changes over time it changes as long as it is organic and not rapid.
18 months jail for Tommy Robinson for contempt of court. Good riddance.
But how long before elements of the Right start describing him as a political prisoner, rounded up and incarcerated by Sir Keir's police state?
3.2 seconds?
1) the claims were not false @itvnews Tommy is a political prisoner 2) your sketch artist needs to stick to his f*cking day job. They don’t call him Cataracts-Carl for nothing. #lügenpresse. #TommyRobinson https://x.com/KTHopkins/status/1850899352161501687
I'm interested to see how quickly, and how far, this story crosses in Reform and Conservative Right elements. Since it is Tommy Robinson I think it probably will not go very far.
I wonder if that’s enough for Jamal Hijazi to launch another libel claim?
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.
You have betrayed your race, it seems. My son has too.
If my 'race' involves being the same 'race' as @:Leon, then I'm glad I've put some slightly different blood into it. If he is a prime example of his 'race', then it is truly diseased.
Fortunately, from experience think he's very much an outlier.
Too much time alone + internet access = trouble
lol. I’ve just spent the last 3 weeks in east Asia mixing with a quite fantastical range of humanity. I know far more of the world than you
And yet you're a bog standard racist.
Yes dear, have another Hobnob
Time for bed, Ossie.
You continue, despite my noble example, to use full stops when not needed. Desist. It is ugly
The elegance of the un-perioded sentence is indisputable
This is a troubling case. Some sad deviant guy uses tech to make pedo images. Also “encourages” others to do depraved things
Definitely needs a custodial sentence (also therapy and probably severe medication). But 18 years in prison??? Really?
AFAICS there is no proof any living individual was physically harmed by his actions. Yet he gets 18 years. At the same time Starmer is releasing actual violent pedophile rapists after they’ve served far far less than that
One could almost argue he was doing a service, and we should offer this to paedophiles who want to engage and avoid offending, on the NHS, but for the fact he based them on real kids.
Yes the use of real images of children is what justifies a custodial sentence. But 18 years??!
This is an area of law which will only get thornier. If we can create perfectly plausible fake porn which satisfies pedos and stops them offending, should we?
If no one is hurt, why not? It will actually PREVENT real crimes and real hurt
Of course we should - adult porn is proven to reduce rape, so it's pretty much guaranteed that AI paedophile porn also would reduce child abuse. Plus even more importantly it's not hurting anyone anyway - AI content of any kind whatsoever should be legal imo.
But it's a complete political non starter about a very niche issue, so I wouldn't expend any more effort considering it. You might as well expect them to reform stamp duty!
I completely agree. It’s the obvious cure for horrible pedophilia. I’d also create sexbots for them
Let these sickos enact their fantasies on harmless silicon robots - problem solved
Yet I suspect some weird Puritanism will prevent us doing this - so real kids will still be really hurt
I met Natasha at the weekend. Natasha is a startlingly real looking human dummy on which doctors and forensic scientists can practice operations, autopsies and the like. She has some internal organs and is due to be fitted with more. Its called simulation and it is increasingly used since we got a bit squeamish about people practising on the dead in mortuaries and the like.
She has a variety of vivid injuries and she also has some Russian tattoos (hence her name). She has the weight and bone structure of a human so, for example, if you lift her arm she her hand falls down at the waist. It was a bit weird but probably the most entertaining lecture of our work weekend away. Forensic pathologists seem to be a bit odd but very amusing (on a limited sample).
Its not hard to imagine such complex models serving certain purposes and it is probably getting easier all the time through 3D printing and the like.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
How are you going to design a policy that incentivises white couples to have babies but not not other couples?
I would forbid white men from accessing porn so they are forced to do the real thing
Mixed race couples look at your policy and wonder.
Anyhoo, I think you’re headed for a referral to Prevent.
Strong "started early" vibes from PB's favourite race realist today.
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority.
I mean that around the clearest, most straightforward racism as I've seen on this site.
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
Sorry. Are you saying it’s wrong for me to
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
it's obviously racist to prefer 'white British babies' to British babies.
Yeah, I wonder where Mrs J and my son would like on @Leon 's racial classification system.
You have betrayed your race, it seems. My son has too.
If my 'race' involves being the same 'race' as @:Leon, then I'm glad I've put some slightly different blood into it. If he is a prime example of his 'race', then it is truly diseased.
Fortunately, from experience think he's very much an outlier.
Too much time alone + internet access = trouble
lol. I’ve just spent the last 3 weeks in east Asia mixing with a quite fantastical range of humanity. I know far more of the world than you
And yet you're a bog standard racist.
Yes dear, have another Hobnob
Time for bed, Ossie.
You continue, despite my noble example, to use full stops when not needed. Desist. It is ugly
The elegance of the un-perioded sentence is indisputable
Along with AI, this is the biggest story in the world, yet almost no one talks about it
The other questions about which, as you say, no one wants to talk are first will there be an "Africanisation" (horrible word, can't think of anything else?) of Europe and other parts of the world and what will that mean for the indigenous populations (diminishing as they may be) and second, what measures (if any) could or should the rest of the world take to raise fertility rates?
To me the key is:
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
No. We should aim for zero migration and more white British babies
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
How are you going to design a policy that incentivises white couples to have babies but not not other couples?
I would forbid white men from accessing porn so they are forced to do the real thing
Mixed race couples look at your policy and wonder.
Anyhoo, I think you’re headed for a referral to Prevent.
Strong "started early" vibes from PB's favourite race realist today.
Comments
1. Make the early years of having a child more affordable. The period before school, which if you have two children 2 years apart can span 7 years, is the most costly at a time people are still not at peak salaries, struggling with the housing ladder etc. We should subside childcare more and also build houses to reduce housing costs.
2. Integration of migrants. I would say most historical UK migrants are well integrated into society, particularly by second or third generation. Other countries, and certain pockets of the UK, less so.
3. Controlled pace of migration: think of it like interest rates set by the central bank. Too high and you will fail on point 1 and negative impacts on society will be felt as there are constraints on jobs, housing, infrastructure etc. Too low and you can end up in a society of pensioners.
Get all these right and you can achieve a fertility rate just below replacement levels, with migration plugging the gap at sustainable levels.
You can see the Lab vote dropping by at least 10 points to 43% and most of the Tory vote going to Ref which could make it quite close, although Lab would still be favourites.
Re the "vibes" argument, again there can be a delusional element where people kid themselves but, usually, campaigns have an idea of what they see on the street. The key thing - for me - is that the underlying metrics on how consumers feel suggest people are unhappy and it would be historically unprecedented for voters to feel so negative and yet vote for the incumbent party. It may happen but is unlikely.
If there is any hope for Harris in the closing stages, it may be the reaction to the MSG rally in terms of the comments made although Tony Hinchcliffe is well known as being deliberately obnoxious by design. If you see Republican leaders start to bicker or panic over this, it may suggest the issue has gained salience.
I am not sure that I feel that an increase of 7% in affordable is worth a nearly 5 year delay - apart from anything else it just produces more competition elsewhere in the hosuing system.
I doubt the Hinchcliffe comments will move the dial and it might cause them to waste their efforts attacking someone who isn't the candidate.
https://thestarphoenix.com/news/politics/election/sask-election-day-2024
I do not want to live in a Britain where white people are a minority. Just as Nigerians do not want to live in a Nigeria where they are a racial minority, nor Japanese likewise in Japan: and fair enough
We’ve had enough migration. Good fences make good neighbours
Which means more automation.
Like solar power, the costs of a number of automating a number of things are falling. A big problem is people clinging to the past.
A relative runs a building company. Electric mini diggers (think tiny, one man excavator) are cheap enough now, that buying them to dig basements under houses makes sense. Costs x men’s wages, does the work of y.
First one paid for itself in a year of work…
Yet when he talks to his competitors, they are still living in the world where any task is a matter of enough cheap Eastern Europeans. Invest? That sounds weird!
And they should win because there is zero incentive to vote for a Labour MP when he/she will simple be another number given the Government's vast majority.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Importance_of_religion_by_country
Which isn't to say Harris is a favourite - nobody I think knows given the narrowness of the margins in key state and mixed data. But it's the usual thing of commentators being desperate to make a call for a narrow favourite on incomplete information, despite it being functionally a coin flip.
Plus fears over what a Trump victory would mean, meaning that's the outcome lots of normally sober types are bracing for.
Definitely needs a custodial sentence (also therapy and probably severe medication). But 18 years in prison??? Really?
AFAICS there is no proof any living individual was physically harmed by his actions. Yet he gets 18 years. At the same time Starmer is releasing actual violent pedophile rapists after they’ve served far far less than that
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/oct/28/man-who-used-ai-to-create-child-abuse-images-jailed-for-18-years
Before I built a wall I’d ask to know
What I was walling in or walling out,
And overall I don’t read it as plea for more fences.
But there's been something of a rebound recently.
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/biz/2024/10/602_384841.html
I'd much rather Britain filled with non-white Brits than old racists like you.
When species proliferate too fast for their ecosystem their populations tend to crash - one way or another. Cf lemmings
However humanity needs to manage this difficult, necessary and traumatic decline. It won’t be easy
New Hampshire Polling:
Pres:
Trump (R): 50%
Harris (D): 50%
Gov:
Ayotte (R): 52%
Craig (D): 48%
Praecones Analytica / Oct 26, 2024 / n=622
https://x.com/USA_Polling/status/1850903773150912959
1. Want my own race to survive and
2. Want my own country - which has been majority white for its entire existence - to stay that way?
You would not object if Gambians said they wanted Gambia to stay majority black Gambian, rather than become suddenly majority white due to mass migration of whites to Gambia, so why is it “racist” of me to want the same for my own country?
This is an area of law which will only get thornier. If we can create perfectly plausible fake porn which satisfies pedos and stops them offending, should we?
If no one is hurt, why not? It will actually PREVENT real crimes and real hurt
"Survival of the human race" is not the outcome on which we should assess our efforts, IMO. I'm a little more ambitious.
The only possible exception is the early release programme which as we have been told doesn't include that category and is entirely the fault of the last Tory government who did zippo about the prison issue.
As someone who doesn't support Starmer I have no problem with him being blamed for stuff, but let's keep it factual for credibility purposes.
We need a student catcher who does 9mph
But it's a complete political non starter about a very niche issue, so I wouldn't expend any more effort considering it. You might as well expect them to reform stamp duty!
Let these sickos enact their fantasies on harmless silicon robots - problem solved
Yet I suspect some weird Puritanism will prevent us doing this - so real kids will still be really hurt
Anyhoo, I think you’re headed for a referral to Prevent.
Will Stancil
@whstancil
·
15m
A few things that are coming clear:
-with election day voting up compared to 2020, this race will largely be decided Tuesday
-there are still major campaign developments sending shockwaves through media, like the MSG rally
-we're pretty much past the polling horizon
Will Stancil
@whstancil
·
14m
So we're more or less flying blind now.
https://x.com/whstancil
The species alive during the Eocene optimum would hate this ice age climate, so it isn't that 4 degrees would kill all life on earth.
It might flood London, but cities come and go.
Loss of natural habitat seems to me to be the most immediate problem. Species can't move if they are constrained, so instead they will be lost.
To take your points in turn:
1. Your race will survive. That's not a real concern, at least not with a timeframe less than 1,000 years.
2. I fundamentally don't care about the race of Britain. I care about Britain and would much rather live here than anywhere else. But it is not the whiteness of Britain that makes is a great place. Non-white Brits, or mixed-race Brits, are just as integrated into British culture as white Brits. There are exceptions, of course, but in general we are pretty good at it (and can aim to be better still).
Your Gambia analogy fails for the reason of pt 3 of my original point: controlled pace of migration being necessary. There is a limit to the pace of migration that any country can support as a proportion of the current population. If Gambia had migration at a sustainable pace, consisting entirely of white people who generally integrated into Gambian culture, and Gambians objected on the basis of race, then yes I would say is racist for them to object to that.
It also has a popular (retiring) Republican Governor, Chris Sununu, albeit one who is very much at the Never Trump end of the party.
That said: polling currently shows the Dems doing relatively worse with Black and Hispanic voters, while doing slightly better with white ones. If this is correct, then it would be very surprising if Trump were to pickup New Hampshire.
It's also worth remembering that in the primaries, this was a State which did not exactly flock to support Donald Trump this time around.
So, I'm going with a relatively comfortable hold Dem hold.
https://variety.com/2024/film/global/uma-thurman-anthony-hopkins-phoebe-dynevor-the-housekeeper-richard-eyre-1236191563/
There's a name or two yet to be added. Sir Richard Eyre can still pull in a few favours...
Or do we all pile back into Africa, back to where we came from.
The world is more cosmopolitan now which is great. The Uk is very different to what it was 150 years ago, but so are the other places I have mentioned. More so. Do you propose changing all of them as well?
Instructive how little amateurs pay attention to what we think everyone knows.
He'd have been furious, though, right?
Fortunately, from experience think he's very much an outlier.
*A group of officers in the Imperial Japanese Army actually did this. Apparently they were concerned that the rank and file would only have ever met other Japanese people. And would get their baby steps in racism wrong.
Should the natural habit change, evolution does its thing, and species change.
That’s your position? If so, I respect it. You are intellectually coherent and honest
I also think it is globalist drivelling nonsense which has caused evil already and will lead to far right governments everywhere, because it contradicts human nature
As it wasn't a question to me I didn't feel obliged to counter every idiotic point @leon made.
So you think we should allow him to serve the Master Race? Or is he an irredeemable, ballast existence?
(Trying to get the Nazi terminology right..)
1) the claims were not false @itvnews Tommy is a political prisoner
2) your sketch artist needs to stick to his f*cking day job. They don’t call him Cataracts-Carl for nothing.
#lügenpresse. #TommyRobinson
https://x.com/KTHopkins/status/1850899352161501687
I'm interested to see how quickly, and how far, this story crosses in Reform and Conservative Right elements. Since it is Tommy Robinson I think it probably will not go very far.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxxwtTjLKJs
Why that, and not - say - the DNA that deals with whether your ear lobes are hanging or not?
Carbon dioxide. Not carbon. We don't have lumps of coal floating around in the sky.
Stuff should be allowed to organically evolve and if it changes over time it changes as long as it is organic and not rapid.
stops when not needed. Desist. It is ugly
The elegance of the un-perioded sentence is indisputable
Quite indisputable
She has a variety of vivid injuries and she also has some Russian tattoos (hence her name). She has the weight and bone structure of a human so, for example, if you lift her arm she her hand falls down at the waist. It was a bit weird but probably the most entertaining lecture of our work weekend away. Forensic pathologists seem to be a bit odd but very amusing (on a limited sample).
Its not hard to imagine such complex models serving certain purposes and it is probably getting easier all the time through 3D printing and the like.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcBTOU7RvbU
and:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFkZgxtlcws
Anyhoo Prevent will have a field day with him.